Go to the page where you can download the following files (doc and pdf format): Waking Up To Secret Combinations, by Darren Andrew and Toward Socialist America, by Robert Gorgolione, by clicking here: http://sites.google.com/site/heavenlybanner/files.

Laws of God vs. the Laws of Man

"The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having
the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and
ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the
time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so
branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as
inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the
question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute
not been enacted.
Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow
that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office,
bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and
justifies no acts performed under it .... A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An
unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid
law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law
of the land, it is superseded thereby.
No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it. -- (American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Volume 16, Section 177)

The idea persisted for centuries that the end of the state is the
attainment of justice and that civil authorities act legitimately only
when they follow the principles of justice. ----[Otto Gierke, Political
Theories of the Middle Ages, trans. by F. W. Maitland (Cambridge,
1922), pp. 74ff.; cf. p. 172 for note by Maitland on the theories of
natural law in the Middle Ages. "Men supposed," says Gierke, "that
before the State existed the Lex Naturalis already prevailed as an
obligatory statute and that immediately or mediately from this flowed
those rules of right to which the State owed even the possibility of
its own rightful origin. And men also taught that the highest power on
earth was subject to the rules of Natural Law. They stood above the
Pope and above the Kaiser, above the Ruler and above the Sovereign
People, nay, above the whole Community of Mortals. Neither statute nor
act of government, neither resolution of the People nor custom could
break the bounds that thus were set. Whatever contradicted the eternal
and immutable principles of Natural Law was utterly void and would bind
no one. The medieval theory declared 'that every act of the Sovereign
which broke the bonds drawn by Natural Law was formally null and void.'
... As null and void, therefore, every judge and every other magistrate
who had to apply the law was to treat, not only every unlawful
executive act, but every unlawful statute, even though it were
published by the Pope or Emperor." Ibid., pp. 75, 84. Cf. also,
Carlyle, op. cit., I, 174; III, 32, 128; and Gierke, Johannes Althusius
und die Entwickelung der naturrechtlichen Staats-theorien, 3d ed.
(Breslau, 1913), chap. 6.]

Life, faculties, production—in other words, individuality, liberty,
property—this is man. And in spite of the cunning of artful political
leaders, these three gifts from God precede all human legislation, and
are superior to it. Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On
the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed
beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.--(Frederick Bastiat, _The Law_, pp. 5-6)

"An unconstitutional statute is an utter nullity, is void from the
date of its enactment, and is incapable of creating any rights."
--(Probst V. Board of Education Lands and Funds, DC Neb 103 F)

"By the law of the land is most clearly intended the general law; a
law which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon enquiry, and
renders judgement only after trial. The meaning is, that every citizen
shall hold his life, liberty and property and immunities under the
protection of the general rules which govern society. Everything which
may pass under the form of an enactment, is not, therefore, to be
considered the law of the land." --(Webster, Dartmouth College V.
Woodward, 4 Wheat. 518, 581 [1819])

"Legislative enactments contrary to natural law or natural justice
were regarded as "ipso facto" void and it was declared to be the duty
of all persons to resist their enforcement. The view of the English
Philosopher that "that which is not just is not law and that which is
not law ought not to be obeyed." --(Sydney, Discourses Concerning
Government, Book III Chapter II)

"As men we have God for our King, and are under the law of Reason:
As Christians, we have Jesus the Messiah for our King, and are under
the law revealed by him in the gospel." --(John Locke, The
Reasonableness of Christianity)

"Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of
God hath no need to break the laws of the land:"Wherefore, be subject to
the powers that be, until He reigns whose right it is to reign, and
subdues all enemies under his feet."Behold, the laws which ye have
received from my hand are the laws of the Church, and in this light ye
shall bold them forth. Behold here is wisdom." (Doc. and Cov. 58:21-23.)

"The following I quote from a revelation given in December, 1833, page
357":

According to the laws and the constitution of the people which I have
suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and
protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles,"That
every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity,
according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every
man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of
judgment."Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage
one to another."And for this purpose have I established the constitution
of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very
purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood." (Doc. and Cov.
101:77-80.)

"Again, in a revelation on page 342":

"And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is
my will that my people shall observe to do all things whatsoever I
command them;"And that law of the land which is constitutional,
supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and
privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before
me;"Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my Church,
in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;"And
as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than these,
cometh of evil."I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free
indeed; and the law also maketh you free;"Nevertheless, when the wicked
rule, the people mourn,"Wherefore, honest men, and wise men should be
sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to
uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil."And I
give unto you a commandment, that ye shall forsake all evil and cleave
unto all good, that ye shall live by every word which proceedeth forth
out of the mouth of God;"For he will give unto the faithful line upon
line, precept upon precept; and I will try you and prove you
herewith;"And whoso layeth down his life in my cause, for my name's
sake, shall find it again, even life eternal:"Therefore be not afraid of
your enemies, for I have decreed in my heart, saith the Lord, that I
will prove you in all things, whether you will abide in my covenant,
even unto death, that you may be found worthy;"For if ye will not abide
in my covenant, ye are not worthy of me." (Doc. and Cov. 98:4-15.)

"This, as I understand it, is the law of God to the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints in all the world. And the requirements here
made of us must be obeyed, and practically carried out in our lives, in
order that we may secure the fulfilment of the promises which God has
made to the people of Zion. And it is further written, that inasmuch as
ye will do the things which I command you, thus saith the Lord, then am
I bound; otherwise there is no promise. We can therefore only expect
that the promises are made and will apply to us when we do the things
which we are commanded." (Doc. and Cov. 82:10; 101:7; 124:47-49.)

"We are told here that no man need break the laws of the land who will
keep the laws of God. But this is further defined by the passage which I
read afterwards—the law of the land, which all have no need to break, is
that law which is the constitutional law of the land, and that is as God
himself has defined it. And whatsoever is more or less than this cometh
of evil. Now, it seems to me that this makes this matter so clear that
it is not possible for any man who professes to be a member of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to make any mistake, or to
be in doubt as to the course be should pursue under the command of God
in relation to the observance of the laws of the land. I maintain that
the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has ever been faithful
to the constitutional laws of our country. I maintain, also, that I have
a right to this opinion, as an American citizen, as one who was not only
born on American soil, but who descended from parents who for
generations were born in America. I have a right to interpret the law in
this manner, and to form my own conclusions and express my opinions
thereon, regardless of the opinions of other men."

"I ask myself, What law have you broken? What constitutional law
have you
not observed? I am bound not only by allegiance to the government of
the
United States but by the actual command of God Almighty, to observe and
obey every constitutional law of the land, and without hesitancy I
declare to this congregation that I have never violated nor
transgressed
any law, I am not amenable to any penalties of the law, because I have
endeavored from my youth up to be a law-abiding citizen, and not only
so, but to be a peacemaker, a preacher of righteousness, and not only
to
preach righteousness by word, but by example. What, therefore, have I
to
fear? The Lord Almighty requires this people to observe the laws of the
land, to be subject to "the powers that be," so far as they abide by
the
fundamental principles of good government, but he will hold them
responsible if they will pass unconstitutional measures and frame
unjust
and proscriptive laws, as did Nebuchadnezzar and Darius, in relation to
the three Hebrew children and Daniel. If lawmakers have a mind to
violate their oath, break their covenants and their faith with the
people, and depart from the provisions of the constitution, where is
the
law, human or divine, which binds me, as an individual, to outwardly
and
openly proclaim my acceptance of their acts?" --(Joseph F. Smith,
Gospel Doctrine: Selections from the Sermons and Writings of Joseph F.
Smith, compiled by John A. Widtsoe [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co.,
1939], 406; Also included in "Gospel Doctrine: Selections from the
Sermons and Writings of Joseph F. Smith, Sixth President of the Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, A Course of Study for the
Melchizedek Priesthood Quorums 1971-1972," Vol 2., pgs., 179-183)

"My attitude toward government is succinctly expressed by the
following provision taken from the Alabama Constitution: 'That the sole
object and only legitimate end of government is to protect the citizen
in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property, and when the
government assumes other functions it is usurpation and oppression.'"
(Art. I Sec 35) --(Ezra Taft Benson, The proper role of Government,
Conference Report April 1968)

"The end of the law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve
and enlarge freedom. For in all the states of created beings, capable
of laws, where there is no law there is no freedom." --(John Locke, Two
Treatises of Civil Government, II, 57; also quoted by Ezra Taft Benson,
Conference Report, April 1968)

"This law of nature, being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God
himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is
binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times, no
human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them
as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, meidately
or immediately, from this original." --(William Blackstone, 1765,
_Commentaries On The Laws Of England_, Book I, Sec 2, No. 41)

"The origin of justice is to be found in law, for law is a natural
force; it is the mind and reason for the intelligent man, the standard
by which Justice and Injustice are measured . . . but in determining
what Justice is, let us begin with that Supreme Law which had its
origin ages before any written law existed or any State had been
established." --(Cicero, _Laws_, I, 19)

"My lords, let us consider just law. Does it bring tranquility, good
order, piety, justice and liberty and property to a people? Does it
nourish patriotism and the way of a manly and upright life? Then it is
a good law, and deserves our utter obedience. But if it brings pain,
intolerable burdens, injustice, sleepless anxiety and fear and slavery
to a people, then it is an evil law passes and upheld by evil men, who
hate humanity and wish to subjugate and control it." --(Cicero, quoted in
A Pillar of Iron, p. 163)

"The essence of law does not depend upon words and clauses, inserted
in a code or statute book, much less upon the conclusion and
explications of lawyers; but upon reason and the nature of things
antecedent to all laws." --(Trenchard and Gordon, as quoted by Gordon
Wood, The Creation of the American Republic, p. 456)

"The imagining omnipotence that whatever is ordained must be law,
without any exception fo right or wrong, must be restrained within the
bounds of reason, justice and natural equity, and acts therefore which
are contrary to nature, justice, morality, benevolence, are contrary to
reason, and notwithstanding the authority of Kings, Lords, or Commons,
were null, and void, being mere corruptions and not laws." --(An
unnamed North Carolinian writing in 1787, as quoted by Gordon Wood,
_The Creation of the American Republic_, p. 458)

"It is a monstrous absurdity to suppose, that the law is to be
learnt by a perpetual copying of precedents. For time immemorial can
never give a sanction to what is against reason and common sense."
--(William Livington, as quoted by Hamlin, _Legal Edition_, p. 159)

"Kings and parliaments did not make law, according to the medieval
tradition; they discovered what was the law and promulgated it."
--(Clarence B. Carson, _The American Tradition_, p. 40)

"Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of
revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should
be suffered to contradict these. There are, it is true, a great number
of indifferent points, in which both the divine law and the natural
leave a man at his own liberty; but which are found necessary for the
benefit of society to be restrained within certain limits. And herein
it is that human laws have their greatest force and efficacy: for, with
regard to such points as are not indifferent, human laws are only
declaratory of, and act in subordination to the former. To instance in
the case of murder: this is expressly forbidden by the divine, and
demonstrably by the natural law; and from these prohibitions arises the
true unlawfulness of this crime. Those human laws that annex a
punishment to it do not at all increase its moral guilt, or superadd
any fresh obligation in foro conscientiae (in the court of conscience)
to abstatin from its perpetration. Nay, if any human law should allow
or enjoin us to commit it, we, are bound to transgress that human law,
or else we must offend both the natural and the divine." --(William
Blackstone, as quoted by Clarence B. Carson in _The American
Tradition_, p. 41)

"We may safely assert . . . that no civil rulers are to be obeyed
when they enjoin things that are inconsistent with the commands of God
. . . all commands running counter to the declared will of the Supreme
Legislator of Heaven and Earth, are null and void; and therefore disobedience to them is a duty, not a crime . . ." --(Jonathan Mayhew,
as quoted by Clarence B. Carson in _The American Tradition_, p. 42)

"But where says some is the King of America? I'll tell you, friend,
he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the Royal
Brute of Britain. Yet that we may not appear to be defective even in
earthly honors, let a day be solemnly set aside for proclaiming the
charter, let it be brought forth placed on the divine law, the word of
God, let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that
so far as we approve of monarchy, that in America THE LAW IS KING. for
as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the
law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other. But lest any ill
use should afterwards arise, let the crown at the conclusion of the
ceremonies be demolished, and scattered among the people whose right it
is." --(Thomas Paine, _Common Sense_, 1776)

"To all who have discerning eyes, it is apparent that the republican
form of government established by our noble forefathers cannot long
endure once fundamental principles are abandoned. Momentum is gathering
for another conflict--a repetition of the crisis of two hundred years
ago. This collision of ideas is worldwide. Another monumental moment is
soon to be born. The issue is the same that precipitated the great
premortal conflict--will men be free to determine their own course of
action or must they be coerced? We are fast approaching that moment
prophesied by Joseph Smith when he said, 'even this nation will be on
the very verge of crumbling to pieces and tumbling to the ground, and
when the Constitution is upon the brink of ruin, this people will be
the staff upon which the nation shall lean, and they shall bear the
Constitution away from the very verge of destruction.' (July 19, 1840,
Church Historians Office, SLC)." --(Ezra Taft Benson, The Constitution: A
Heavenly Banner, Deseret Book, 1986, p. 27-28)

"When Kings, ministers, governors, or legislators, therefore,
instead of exercising the powers entrusted with them according to the
principles, forms, and proportions stated by the constitution, and
established by the original compact, prostitute those powers to the
purpose of oppression; to subvert, instead of supporting a free
constitution; to destroy, instead of preserving the lives, liberties
and properties of the people; they are no longer to be deemed
magistrates vested with a sacred character, but become public enemies,
and ought to be resisted." --(John Adams, _The Works of John Adams,
Second President of the United States: With a Life of the Author, notes
and illustration_, by Charles Francis Adams, 1856; also quoted by
President David O. McKay, Conference Report, Oct 1961)

"Then we have our local Legislature, as other Territories have, to
enact laws for the protection of the good and virtuous, for punishment
of crime, the execution of justice, and the preservation of peace and
good order throughout the Territory. Is there anything wrong in all
this? Not that I am aware of. Whose rights have we interfered with? Who
cannot obtain justice here? Who are deprived of their rights here? Is
there any man, woman, or child, stranger or citizen deprived of his or
her rights, or who cannot obtain a hearing for grievances real or
imaginary? Who is there throughout the length and breadth of the
Territory who cannot obtain the full benefit of law, equity, and
justice? No one. Well, we are here in this capacity, and there are
other things that underlie these, if you please. The Republicans, you
know, in the States, have been very fond for a long time of talking
about a higher law of some kind. We, too, have a higher law, not a
negro law particularly, but a law that emanates from God; a law that is
calculated to promote the best interests and the happiness of this
people, and of the world when they will listen to it. Then do you
profess to ignore the laws of the land? No; not unless they are
unconstitutional, then I would do it all the time. Whenever the
Congress of the United States, for instance, pass a law interfering
with my religion, or with my religious rights, I will read a small
portion of that instrument called the Constitution of the United
States, now almost obsolete, which says—"Congress shall pass no law
interfering with religion or the free exercise thereof;" and I would
say, gentlemen, you may go to Gibraltar with your law, and I will live
my religion. When you become violators of the Constitution you have
sworn before high heaven to uphold, and perjure yourselves before God,
then I will maintain the right, and leave you to take the wrong just as
you please. There are other things, too, that I, as an individual would
do. There have been attempts made here to interfere with the trial by
jury, a right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States as
well as by the Magna Charta of England. And we have had cases right in
our midst where a judge has told the jury that if they did not bring in
such a verdict as he had instructed them to, he would set it aside. Of
what use, then, is a jury? Why not let the judge act without them; if
they are to be dictated to by him what becomes of our freedom? If my
services as a juryman were required, I would give my opinion frankly
and honestly, and no judge should control me; but I would try to be a
man, and would not be cowed by any man sent among us trying to pervert
justice. No man should make a scapegoat of me; if he wished to violate
constitutional rights he should do it on his own responsibility. Some
men will endure a great deal in matters of this kind, and they will
call it humility; but I desire no such humility. I want a principle
that will maintain, uphold, and stand by the rights of man, giving to
all men everywhere equal rights, and that will preserve inviolate the
fundamental principles of the Constitution of our country." --(John
Taylor, _Journal of Discourses_, Vol. 11, p. 343-345, Delivered in the
Tabernacle March 31st 1867)

". . . And while we acknowledge, as citizens of the United States,
the laws and institutions thereof (which by the way are very easily
complied with), we have a higher law, more noble principles, ideas that
are more elevated and expansive; principles that reach to the whole
human family, and which he will continue to reveal to us. Does that
prevent us from obeying the laws of the land? Certainly not. But then,
is that a perfect system? I do not think that many of you will say it
is, nor do I think that the people of the United States of any
political party will tell you it is. I do not wish to cast any
reflections or refer to any events that have taken place; I am merely
speaking on religious principles, and principles too in which we as
Latter-day Saints are interested. We are united, then, as a body
politic, as an integral part of this Government, and it becomes our
duty to submit to the laws and institutions of that Government—to all
that are constitutional, framed and based upon correct principles, and
not in violation of what the fathers of the country instituted."
--(John Taylor, _Journal of Discourses_, Vol. 21, p. 32, Delivered in
the Tabernacle during General Conference, April 9, 1879)

The following statements were made in regards to the Church's defiance of the law of the land over polygamy:

John Taylor said, “We believe in … loyalty to our country, but when they enact laws, forbidding us the free exercise of our religion, we cannot submit. God is greater than the United States; and when the government conflicts with Heaven, we will be ranged under the banner of Heaven against the government… If the United States say different the Saints cannot obey it. … [W]e will worship God according to the dictates of our own conscience.” (1/6/1880)

Heber J. Grant: “No matter what restrictions we are placed under by men, our only consistent course is to keep the commandments of God. We should, in this regard, place ourselves in the same position as that of the three Hebrews who were cast into the fiery furnace.” (4/5/1885)

George Q. Cannon: “I admit that those raising children by plural wives are not complying with man-made laws, but in the sight of God they are not sinning, as there is no sin in it.” (Reed Smoot Hearings 1:9)

Wilford Woodruff: “God says, “We shall be damned if we do not obey the law.” Congress says, “We shall be damned if we do.” It places us precisely in the same position that it did the Hebrews in the fiery furnace, and Daniel in the den of lions. … Our enemies have pursued the same course … and made it a law of offense to obey one of the laws of our God. Now who shall we obey? God or man? My voice is that we obey God.” (4/21/1879)

Apostles Penrose & Richards wrote a letter to John Taylor stating: “We then say, we consider the law of God superior to the law of the State, and if we have to break the law of the State to keep the law of God, we will stand by the consequences.” (2/16/1887)

John Taylor: “I defy the United States. I will obey the will of God. These are my sentiments, and all of you who sympathize with me in this position raise your right hand.” (1/6/1880)